Suchergebnisse

In the 1960s, the golden age of development in Europe came to an end, the socialist economies failed to adapt to the new situation and began to reform their economic system. The Yugoslav federal leadership announced economic reforms in 1961 and 1965, considered to be the best programme of economic reform and modernization during the institutional development of the Second socialist Yugoslavia. The self management system was based on the premises that the state control of the economy and planning should be replaced by contractual bargains among socially-owned enterprises, indicative planning and market mechanism. Kraigher's reform (1965) strengthened the developmental principles and the position of industry as the leading economic activity on the one hand and stabilisation programme on the other. However, the stabilisation policy failed to live up to expectations, and its restrictive measures created new imbalances. Kraigher's reform deepened the economic volatility, economic growth declined, while inflation and foreign debt swelled rapidly. The federal government made no particular efforts to remedy the situation and resolve the problems. In the late 1960s, the Yugoslav economic miracle came to an end. The communist authorities were preparing the grounds for constitutional ammendments, and enforced the adoption where federal communist leadership disciplined the proponents of economic reform and liberal market policies. The socialist economies, like modern EU states (Great Recession 2008-2013), failed to respond to the crisis immediately and with resolute action. This was a key reason for the disintegration of the Second Yugoslavia and could be the new form of balkanisation of EU. Adapted from the source document.

The author demonstrates the non-existence of a consistent theory of market and of the modern capitalist system. Only a conceptual analysis is possible which is more revealing of the methodologies of various theoretical trajectories and a comparative analysis of different viewpoints and theoretical contradictions in relation to historical reality. The fundamental theoretical accomplishment of Strpic's analysis is that it offers a fertile core of clarification of market society and capitalism. The search for modern political economy opens up three aspects of the crisis of capitalism and of its economic theory. The political strategy of laissez faire in the beginning of the 20th century brought about the Great Depression (1929-1933), and the theoretical and political turn to Keynesianism (1936). In the 1970s the great stagflation (1971-1980) cleared the path for the neo-liberal theoretical counterrevolution (1972). In the period of the Great Recession (2007-2012) the necessity is imposed on us of a new theoretical turn in the direction of anti-neo-liberalism. Market economy and its invisible hand cannot be simply suppressed into closed out theoretical systems; the economists overlooked precisely this simplification and abstraction from real relations. Strpic's theoretical project of the Modern Normal and matrix-capitalism makes it possible to read in a new way the incommensurability of theoretical paradigms, not as a unified theory but as a developmental project which is prerequisite for explaining the character of the present crisis and the dynamic development of the modern transformation of capitalism. Adapted from the source document.

In this article, the author relates the role of money & finances with the basic structuring of social relations. Money is the only universal form of social wealth, its measure & its meaning. Up to the present, however, the economic theory has been underestimating & overlooking money's politico-economic role. This is revealed most radically in periods of major financial & economic crises. Consequently, the author points out that today's economy of depression often depresses the economists themselves & their science. Bidet's theory of modernity, along with Habermas's, is the last large-scale attempt at theoretical explanation of the social totality, but his theoretical reconstruction of society by means of underlying "metastructures" is based on non-financial & non-monetary forms of social mediation. In contrast, the author of this article seeks to prove that precisely money & finances belong to the central metastructure of market society. What is important here is not only the subversive role of money as the monopoly-holding & political good in the exchange, but also its financial form of debt, resulting from the particular social role of debt accumulation. Society is connected with debt accumulation, & the economic sovereignty of money is its political legitimacy as debt. Therein lies its sociality, the foundation of underlying communication & of cooperation as metastructure of market society development. The present-day crisis has propelled the debt accumulation problem to absurd levels. It has brought to light that the greatest contradictions of today's market society are based on the economic & social globalization of finances. Contemporary capitalism is a genuine financial capitalism, which is why there can be no solution without a politico-economic & cultural reconstruction of the monetary regime & of financial economy. Accordingly, the author shows that the solution to the current economic crisis points precisely to the "metastructure" of market society. Adapted from the source document.